5 ms·
This is due to people sharing malware: https://www.techradar.com/news/mozilla-suspends-firefox-send-service-following-malware-abuse https://www.techradar.com/n
by 0-_-0 6y ago
This is due to people sharing malware:
https://www.techradar.com/news/mozilla-suspends-firefox-send-service-following-malware-abuse https://www.techradar.com/news/mozilla-suspends-firefox-send...
The content can't be scanned server-side because uploaded files are encrypted
- akuji1993 6y agoI mean... Were they really suprised by this? An encrypted file sharing service, of course it's going to be used for sharing malware and illegal content.. I'm not sure what would've been the solution for this issue, but it was pretty clear that that was gonna happen...
- rvz 6y agoExactly. Most definitely bad actors would use this free encrypted file-sharing service. But I suspect that this wasn't even sustainable for Mozilla to begin with. The road to hell is paved with good intentions here.
- therealx 6y agoOnly allowing one time downloads seemed reasonable to stop 1 and 2 stage payloads. Doesn't help exfiltration, but theres so many options for that anyway. One time downloads may be annoying for non-web savvy people, but seemed like a reasonable tradeoff.
- taneq 6y agoThis seems like a feature, not a bug. People can send things privately to you. It's important, therefore, to verify who you're talking to. Maybe instead of blaming it on the lack of server-side malware scans (which are always easily defeated) they could blame it on lack of an appropriate way to build a framework of trust between endpoints?
- mav3rick 6y agoYou're assuming the good case of people sending naive users a virus. But think of two consenting parties sharing cp or something else. It's a legal hell hole.
- ziml77 6y agoBut it tarnishes their name. People who get malware through Firefox Send will associate Firefox or Mozilla with viruses because that's where it's being served from. It doesn't matter to them that it's fully the fault of the person sharing the malware, they expect that if a site is serving them content then that site can ensure that it's safe.
- blooalien 6y agoTerrible shame how lame people somehow always find a way to ruin everything good they find online for everyone else without a second thought about it. :(
- perryizgr8 6y agoSo the problem is that people used a service for doing what it said it should be used for? Private file sharing.
- somebodythere 6y agoA person abusing the privacy features of a file sharing platform to send unwanted files that damage people's computers is in fact, a bad thing That is not an argument against privacy but it does make it harder to provider private services
- huhtenberg 6y agoWeTransfer has been abused the exact same way for as long as they existed even though I don't think they have the e2e encryption. They are still operational. That is, it's an issue with the file transfer services as a class that can be managed, but Mozilla decided against wasting time/resources on that and just nuked it instead.
- ekianjo 6y agoHow unpredictable! Where have they been since the Internet started being around?
- shultays 6y agoBant they just scan them on receiver side? Like how it scans dowloaded files
- parliament32 6y agoHow do related products, like Mega, deal with this?
- dylz 6y agoRequire accounts, tracking, no throwaway emails, heavily logged, no anon uploads, fingerprinting clients on register to prevent multiple-account freeloading, making money off plans to have full time abuse team